Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Excessive fee cases against plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) have been on the rise for the last decade. ERISA litigation is expanding with novel theories such as forfeiture litigation....more
Under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007 (April 17, 2025), plaintiffs asserting that ERISA plan administrators engaged in prohibited transactions under ERISA Section 406 are...more
In Cunningham v. Cornell University,1 the Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs who bring a prohibited transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) are only...more
by Alex Smith The Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding the pleading standards for ERISA prohibited transactions claims in a case involving Cornell’s 403(b) plan to resolve a federal circuit court split. Under...more
The US Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion that could lead to an increase in litigation for prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA)....more
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 17, 2025, issued a greatly anticipated decision in which the justices unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging a prohibited transaction under Section 1106(a)(1)(C) of the Employee Retirement...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Cunningham v Cornell University, addressing the pleading standard applicable to prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
Key takeaway: The Supreme Court held that to state an ERISA prohibited-transaction claim under 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a), a plaintiff needs only to plausibly allege the elements contained in § 1106(a) itself and does not need to...more
In a unanimous decision reversing dismissal of prohibited transaction claims based on fees paid to defined contribution plan recordkeepers, the Supreme Court held that ERISA’s prohibited transaction exemptions are affirmative...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007: This case addresses the pleading standard to assert a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement...more
Key Takeaways - In October 2024, SCOTUS granted review of Cunningham v. Cornell University to provide guidance on certain pleading standards in ERISA litigation claims, with oral arguments scheduled for January 2025....more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted a petition for a writ of certiorari to review the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, 86 F.4th 961 (2d Cir. 2023). In doing so,...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in 15 cases: Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Solutions, No. 23-971: This case concerns the intersection between Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, which...more
On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit issued its opinion in Hughes v. Northwestern University, concluding that participants in two Northwestern 403(b) plans plausibly pled fiduciary-breach claims based on...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University, an important ERISA case. Although the Court’s decision vacated a Seventh Circuit victory for plan sponsor...more
Hughes v. Northwestern University, No. 19-1401: This case concerns the proper pleading standard for certain breach of fiduciary duty claims brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”)....more
On December 6, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in Hughes v. Northwestern University, a case debating the allegations necessary to state a plausible claim for breach of ERISA’s fiduciary duties in cases challenging...more
On November 9, 2020, the Supreme Court declined to consider an appeal from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander, leaving unresolved for now questions about the specificity...more
“Employer securities” in retirement plans have been the source of a significant amount of litigation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”). In general, “employer securities” are...more
The United States Supreme Court, in a per curiam decision, declined to address whether plan participants sufficiently alleged breach of fiduciary duty claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as...more
In January, the Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander, No. 18-1165, a case that promised to clarify the pleading standard applicable to ERISA stock-drop cases. But...more
Editor's Overview - Happy New Year. We wrap-up 2019 with an article that reflects on significant developments in ERISA litigation during 2019, and takes a look at what's on the horizon for 2020. The courts (at all levels)...more
Brief Takeaway: Plan sponsors that offer employer stock in their benefit plans can breathe a sigh of relief, as the Supreme Court vacated one of the only plaintiff-friendly rulings in ERISA “stock drop” litigation. ...more
The United States Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion on Tuesday in Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v Jander, punting back to the court of appeals the determination of whether plan fiduciaries can be liable under...more